So they can stand out and be better? Really, why do you pick one app over the other at the end of the day? I'd like to think it's because they either do it better than the other app or they do more than the other app. If these free built-in apps stay this way until SP1 or Win9 or w/e doesn't that just leave it open for 3rd party developers to fill in the gaps like they always have?

I also think there is incentive to have a metro version of a desktop app, even a complex one like the stuff adobe makes. At the end of the day it's not the full photoshop client from what I remember hearing so having a "simpler" or "lite" version of beefy desktop apps can only be a good thing. Say a user gets good at the lite version of the app, if they want to really dive into it then offer up the advanced/pro desktop version and you've basically got them hooked.

Are you honestly going to tell me that MetroIE or Music is better? The rest is only confirming my point.

Again, take away the crutch of the desktop version and tell me if that is still acceptable. The point is, until MS shows us if and how complex apps can exist in Metro, there is the same assumption you made, that the Metro Photoshop will be the basic 'essentials' version and Pros will use the desktop. You are still describing a fundamental two app system, so that is an argument for two different OSs - which is not what anyone that is 'pro' Metro should be happy about.

Are you honestly going to tell me that MetroIE or Music is better? The rest is only confirming my point.

Again, take away the crutch of the desktop version and tell me if that is still acceptable. The point is, until MS shows us if and how complex apps can exist in Metro, there is the same assumption you made, that the Metro Photoshop will be the basic 'essentials' version and Pros will use the desktop. You are still describing a fundamental two app system, so that is an argument for two different OSs - which is not what anyone that is 'pro' Metro should be happy about.

I'm not saying they're better than they're desktop counterparts, not at this point in time but only that this leaves it open for other developers to try and make better metro versions. What if Metro FF or Metro Chrome is better than Metro IE and has more features? What if someone makes a better music app than the built in music? I don't see why any of this can't happen exactly, baring any limitations in winrt itself.

I also don't see why you can't be pro metro and not also support the idea of having both metro and desktop apps? Unless by pro metro you mean those who want to go metro only? I think MS has already started to show how you can make more complex apps with OneNote MX. The radial dial element is a step to replacing drop down menus and also, unless this is blocked somehow, why can't you have lots of options popup from either the app bar at the bottom or down from the top? In the long run I have no doubt we'll see more advanced metro apps. The second part of my post was answering the question as to "why" a desktop developer would bother doing a metro app. I think my answer was clear, even if the metro version of your app is simpler that's no reason not to jump in now and do it, then you can get people to use it and get them hooked and also get them to move up to the desktop version.

Lots of people don't use a number of different desktop apps because they're too complex for them from the start. It takes time to wrap your head around something like photoshop, or premier etc. Now just think if you can start them off with the basics and then basically up-sell them later. Why wouldn't you want to do that?

The built in PDF reader is nothing to write home about on a 'proper' PC, compared to Adobe's existing product. It's really only WinRT devices where Adobe doesn't have a competing offering yet, and it will take time before such devices get any relevant market share at all.

They have, it's called OneNote MX.

Does that really count as a 'complex app'? (Haven't actually used it yet since I couldn't get it to launch)

Attached Images

The built in PDF reader is nothing to write home about on a 'proper' PC, compared to Adobe's existing product. It's really only WinRT devices where Adobe doesn't have a competing offering yet, and it will take time before such devices get any relevant market share at all.

Does that really count as a 'complex app'? (Haven't actually used it yet since I couldn't get it to launch)

OneNote MX is the most complex Metro app I've used so far. The radial menu really kills it. Most functional thing I've seen in Metro so far.

I'm shocked by this because when Windows 8 was still in beta apologists kept saying "Wait until the product is finished". Now Windows 8 hit RTM people still aren't allowed to criticize the over-simplicity of the build-in apps? Redirecting people to the desktop is just a lame response. Especially because there are no build-in desktop counterparts that actually offer more functionality.

I agree but as for MDI and Windowing, desktop environment is same just faster and no start button. You will see the Start Page as much as you see your Start Menu today. Rarely. Yeah, search is irritating and less efficient and not unified but you can ESC back to desktop, same as if you stop a Start Menu search today. It's really not that bad. The Metro apps, yeah, they're weak so far.